6poji - uw-stout · 2011. 9. 7. · helpful solution-focused compliments can be for clients...

1

Author: Kadieva, Violeta, D. Title: Types of Praise Used by MFT Supervisors and Their Influence on MFT

Supervisees The accompanying research report is submitted to the University of Wisconsin-Stout, Graduate School in partial

completion of the requirements for the

Graduate Degree/ Major: MS Marriage and Family Therapy

Research Adviser: Bruce Kuehl, Ph.D.

Submission TermN ear: Summer, 2011

Number of Pages: 47

Style Manual Used: American Psychological Association, 6th edition

D I understand that this research report must be officially approved by the Graduate School and that an electronic copy of the approved version will be made available through the University Library website D I attest that the research report is my original work (that any copyrightable materials have been used with the permission of the original authors), and as such, it is automatically protected by the laws, rules, and regulations of the U.S. Copyright Office.

STUDENT'S NAME: Violeta Kadieva

STUDENT'S SIGNATURE: ==~=3;:::::::v~-'-~-::4~~=~~=-,--__ iJ_.r_. t?_lf_" fIt DATE: V-i!)teb. ... ~ e~~~ ADVISER'S NAME (com~~~"i;MS Thesis or Field ProjectJProblem): Bruce Kuehl Ct)"" ADVISER'S SIGNATURE: ~~~~~~~::::::::::7-______ D.ATE: '?'/

2

Kadieva, Violeta, D. Types of Praise Used by MFT Supervisors and Their Influence

on MFT Supervisees.

Abstract

The purpose of this study will be to compare the differences between Marriage and

Family Therapy (MFT) student perceptions of (a) different types of praise used by MFT

supervisors (praise for ability; praise for effort), (b) MFT students primary self-theory of

intelligence (incremental versus entity) and (c) MFT students attitude toward continued

development of skills. A number of hypotheses were tested, including the hypothesis that

students who score high on incremental types of intelligence will score high on praise for effort.

It is hypothesized that students who score high on incremental intelligence will score high on

their continued effort to improve their skills as therapists. It is also hypothesized that students

who scored high on entity theory of intelligence will score high on praise for ability. In addition,

praise for ability will have negative consequences for both incremental and entity theorists due to

students reporting less persistence in improving skills. To assess these factors, participants in the

research were given Dweck’s Self-theories of intelligence scale, Questionnaire Goal Choice

Items and Implicit Theory of the World (1999). They were also given items to assess how much

they report receiving praise for ability and effort, and items to assess students’ perceptions of

upgrading their competency. The participants consisted of MFT Master’s students from UW-

Stout in the clinical portion of their training and those who have graduated within two years. An

absence of variability among items made grouping subjects for statistical comparisons

impossible. Such strong response trends are revealing and are discussed.

3

The Graduate School

University of Wisconsin Stout

Menomonie, WI

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank my whole family back home in Bulgarian, Klara, Dimiter, Kiril and

Kaloian, who have been extremely supportive to me during all my years of education in the

States. In addition, I would like to thank my boyfriend and my friends, who I consider my second

family in the States. Your encouragement and support means a lot to me! I would not have been

able to accomplish all this without you. Also, I would like to thank all my teachers during the

years, because they made a big difference in my life. They showed me the pathway toward

knowledge and helped me develop love for knowledge and interest in learning. I am especially

grateful to Dr. Kuehl, who trusted my therapeutic and research skills from the beginning of my

journey at UW-Stout, always praised me for my efforts, and warmly guided all my work as a

therapist and researcher in the field.

4

Table of Contents

.................................................................................................................................................... Page

Abstract ............................................................................................................................................2

Chapter I: Introduction ....................................................................................................................6

Statement of the Problem .....................................................................................................7

Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................8

Assumptions of the Study ....................................................................................................8

Definition of Terms..............................................................................................................9

Methodology ......................................................................................................................10

Chapter II: Literature Review ........................................................................................................11

Theories of Intelligence…………………………………………………………………11

Types of Praise…………………………………………………………………………..13

Teaching techniques and Supervision …………………………………………………..17

Therapists Development and Competency……………………………………………...22

Chapter III: Methodology ..............................................................................................................25

Subject Selection and Description .....................................................................................25

Instrumentation ..................................................................................................................25

Data Collection Procedures ................................................................................................25

Data Analysis .....................................................................................................................26

Chapter IV: Results ........................................................................................................................29

Item Analysis ....................................................................................................................29

Table 1: Findings……………………………………………………………………......30

Chapter V: Discussion ...................................................................................................................32

5

Limitations ........................................................................................................................34

Recommendations ..............................................................................................................35

Conclusions ........................................................................................................................36

References ......................................................................................................................................37

Appendix A: Implicit Theory of the World……………………………………………………...41

Appendix B: Questionnaire Goal Choice Items.............................................................................42

Appendix C: Praise for Ability and Praise for Effort Questionnaire …… ....................................43

Appendix D: Students’ Perceptions of Upgrading Their Competency…………………………..45

Appendix E: Scoring System…………………………………………………………………….46

6

Chapter I: Introduction

Praise is a strong motivational tool. It leads people to growth and also relates to the way

people formulate their own self-theory of intelligence. Carol Dweck (1999) explained that there

are two different types of self-theories of intelligence. She called them “entity” and

“incremental”. People, who believe that intelligence is a fixed trait are entity theorists and these

who believe that intelligence could be upgraded and improved with hard work are the

incremental theorists. Dweck discovered that these self-theories of intelligence influence

negatively or positively students’ success. The author revealed that students with entity self-

theory of intelligence were not interested in upgrading their skills. They were often concerned

with how smart they were and instead engaged in tasks that would prove that they are intelligent.

They were not willing to risk failure or to keep working on a task after a failure, because they did

not believe that they could improve their performance through hard work. By contrast,

incremental theorists attributed their failure to their effort and strategies. They saw their failure

as a challenge and an opportunity to work harder and do better next time.

Related to this, Dweck (1999) outlined two types of praise, (1) praise for ability (praise

for what a person has accomplished and one’s intelligence) and (2) praise for effort (praise for

putting forth the effort to grow beyond their current skills and level of intelligence). Muller and

Dweck (1998) discovered that praise for ability had a negative effect on student’s motivation to

upgrade their skills, while praise for effort motivated students to enrich their skills. In addition,

their study showed that students who were praised for ability were more likely to believe their

intelligence is fixed (entity theory of intelligence). By contrast, Kamins and Dweck (1999)

revealed that students who were praised for effort persisted more in resolving tasks as opposed to

students who were praised for their ability, and they believed their intelligence could grow.

7

Supervision is the tool that Marriage and Family Therapy (MFT) supervisors use to help

therapists learn how to provide psychotherapy. It is also the means through which professional

therapists upgrade their knowledge and skills (Duffy-Roberts, 1999). Duffy-Roberts looked at

the “lived experience” of supervisors and outlined how supervision creates meaning for these

involved with it. It was explained that supervisors have certain responsibilities toward their

supervisees. Some of these included building a vision and helping supervisees with their

professional development process.

Statement of the Problem

Many authors have talked about the power of praise and how it affects individuals

(Brophy, 1981; Koestner, Zuckerman, & Koestner, 1987; Schunk, 1983, 1994; cf. Delin &

Baumeister, 1994; Mueller & Dweck, 1998; Dweck, 1999, 2006, 2007; Zentall, Shannon,

Morris, & Bradley, 2010). Unfortunately, some studies have shown that praise is not being used

by many supervisors because of various reasons, the belief of creating jealous and highly

competitive work environment, the belief of praising only spectacular acts, etc. (Leonard, 1997).

In addition, if the wrong kind of praise is used it could lead to serious negative consequences for

students (Dweck, 2007). The author mentioned that wrong kind of praise can create self-

defeating behaviors in students. She also pointed out that entity theorist students may reject

opportunities to learn if they believe that they might make a mistake. Hence, if students’ self-

theories of intelligence and supervisors’ type of praise are assessed at some point and time of the

educational process this could be extremely helpful for both groups and can lead to improved

professional growth.

In the Marriage and Family Therapy (MFT) field praise is used by clinicians as a

therapeutic approach (Leitenberg, Agras, Allen, Butz, & Edwards, 1975; Yu, Roberts, Wong, &

8

Shen, 2011; Funderburk & Eyberg, 2011). There are numerous research studies showing how

helpful solution-focused compliments can be for clients (Metcalf, 1995; Fiske & Zalter, 2005;

Bliss & Bray, 2009). Praise is used also by supervisors as a tool of motivating supervisees and

helping them grow in their skills, competency and confidence. Yet, while there are many

research projects based on different supervisors’ techniques, there is no research describing the

different types of praise that MFT supervisors use and how these influence MFT supervisees.

Purpose of the Study

This research project looks at different types of self-theories of intelligence that students

have and compare them to the different types of praise that MFT supervisors use (according to

students’ perceptions). It also looks at how these types of praise influence students’ attitude

toward upgrading their professional skills. The results of this study will help supervisors

understand how praise benefits student skill development. The researcher will observe how

different types of praise motivate or demotivate students and how they help or hinder students’

process of gaining confidence and growing as therapists.

Assumptions of the Study

Since this is a pilot study, multiple hypotheses are generated consistent with Dweck’s

model in order to investigate a wide variety of possible outcomes. More specifically: (1) It is

hypothesized that participants who indicate high entity intelligence will also indicate high

perceived praise for ability. (2) It is hypothesized that participants who indicate low entity

intelligence will indicate low perceived praise for effort. (3) It is hypothesized that participants

who indicate high incremental intelligence will also indicate high perceived praise for effort. (4)

It is hypothesized that participants who indicate low incremental intelligence will indicate high

perceived praise for ability. (5) It is hypothesized that participants who indicate high perceived

9

praise for effort will indicate high continued effort to develop their therapeutic skills. (6)It is

hypothesized that participants who indicate low perceived praise for effort will indicate reduced

effort to develop their therapeutic skills. (7) It is hypothesized that participants who indicate high

perceived praise for ability will indicate low effort to develop their therapeutic skills. (8) It is

hypothesized that participants who indicate low perceived praise for ability will indicate high

continued effort to develop their therapeutic skills. (9) It is hypothesized that participants who

indicate high entity intelligence will indicate reduced effort to develop their therapeutic skills.

(10) It is hypothesized that participants who indicate low entity intelligence will indicate high

continued effort to develop their therapeutic skills. (11) It is hypothesized that participants who

indicate high incremental intelligence will indicate high continued effort to develop their

therapeutic skills. (12) It is hypothesized that participants who indicate low incremental

intelligence will indicate reduced effort to develop their therapeutic skills.

Definition of Terms

According to Dweck (1999), Self-theory of intelligence is one’s own theory of one’s

own intelligence. Entity theorists are people who believe that their intelligence is fixed.

Incremental theorists are people who believe that their intelligence is malleable. Muller and

Dweck (1998) explained that praise for ability is praise for one’s intelligence and ability. It is

also called “person praise” (Kamins & Dweck, 1999) and “generic type of praise” (Cimpian,

Arce, Markman, & Dweck, 2007). The authors added that praise for effort is praise for one’s

efforts. They also called “process praise” (Kamins & Dweck, 1999) and “nongeneric type of

praise” (Cimpian et al., 2007).

As defined by this author, development is the process of upgrading one’s intelligence

and skills. Continued development is continuing the process of upgrading one’s skills and

10

intelligence. Reduced development is stopping the process of upgrading one’s skills and

intelligence.

Methodology

Participants will be identified using the UW-Stout MFT program email addresses for the

most recent two years of students who have or are completing the clinical practicum portion of

their training. They will be contacted via email asking them to participate in the investigator’s

Plan B study. The email will contain a link to an on-line questionnaire. Informed Consent will

be placed at the beginning of the questionnaire. Those who choose to participate in the research

will respond to items based on Dweck’s “Self-Theories of Intelligence Scales,” “Questionnaire

Goal Choice Items” and “Implicit Theory of the World” (1999). Items will also be included to

assess students’ perception of the degree to which supervisors praised their ability and effort, and

items assessing students’ reported effort to upgrade their competency. The questionnaire will

consist of 25 items. The hypotheses will most likely be analyzed using t-tests. Demographic

data will be collected regarding participant’s age and sex.

11

Chapter II: Literature Review

Self-Theories of Intelligence

Carol Dweck (1999) observed how students navigated through their school career. She

noticed that some students persisted after failure and continued to be motivated in upgrading

their skills, while others gave up one goal and switched to a different goal that could show them

as skillful and knowledgeable students. Dweck discovered that different students had different

believes. Some of them believed that they could improve their intelligence level and skills, called

“incremental theorists”, and others thought that they were born with a certain IQ, which could

not be upgraded, called “entity theorists”. Dweck and Leggett (1988) revealed that entity

theorists attributed outcomes more to ability and less to effort than incremental theorists.

Researchers also revealed that negative feedback affected entity theorists more in a sense that

they showed less motivation and desire to upgrade their skills as compared to incremental

theorists.

Research done by Dweck and Henderson (1990) pointed out that entity theorists were

more likely to attribute their failure to their intelligence than incremental theorists. The authors

observed students during their transition to high school. Students were asked to explain what

they would attribute their potential poor grades to. Entity theorists answered that this would be a

result of their poor intelligence. Incremental theorists said that this would be due to their poor

efforts.

Another study (Dweck, Chiu, & Hong, 1995) showed that entity theorists who saw their

intelligence as fixed were more likely to blame their intellectual abilities for their failure. The

authors used a three-item questionnaire to outline students’ self-theories of intelligence. After

this they monitored students’ self-judgments in a separate session in which students faced

12

academic failure. Students who had an entity self-theory of intelligence made ability inferences

for their failure. Entity theorists were also found to make global ability judgments after negative

performance. Incremental theorists were said to focus on their poor effort and strategies after

failure.

Hong, Dweck, Chiu, Lin and Wan (1999) also found that entity theorists were less likely

to attribute their failure to their efforts as compared to incremental theorists. Also, incremental

theorists were more likely than entity theorists to take immediate actions to improve their skills.

The authors did three studies. In the first one they used the Dweck and Henderson (1988) scale in

order to identify the entity and incremental theorists. They used also two other scales,

Assessment of self confidence in intelligence and Conceptual ability test. This study showed a

link between entity and incremental theorists and the ability and effort attributions that these

theorists made. In the second study the students were asked to fill a questionnaire about their

preferences. This revealed that incremental theorists were more likely than entity theorists to

work on improving their performance when they realized that their skills in a specific area were

unsatisfactory. The third study had for purpose to show the causal relationship between students’

self-theories of intelligence and their response to different setbacks. Researchers manipulated

participants’ implicit theories in order to do this. This study showed that incremental theorists

attributed their failure to their poor efforts and were more likely to put more efforts to improve

their performance.

Mangels, Butterfield, Lamb, Good and Dweck (2006) looked at students’ self-theories of

intelligence from a neuroscience perspective. They wanted to see if students’ self-theories of

intelligence influenced their success. Also, they wanted to find how these students responded to

negative performance feedback. Entity and incremental theorists were asked general knowledge

13

questions such as “What is the capital of Australia?” Then they were provided with positive and

negative feedback. Students’ frontal response was observed. It was discovered that a frontal

waveform was the greatest when the performance feedback was in a conflict with what the

student expected. The authors revealed that students’ success was influenced not only by

students’ actual abilities but also by their beliefs and goals. Incremental theorists showed greater

gains in knowledge and skills than entity theorists did. They saw errors and negative feedback as

opportunities from which they could learn and upgrade their knowledge and skills. The results

from an achievement goal questionnaire done by Grant and Dweck (2003) also showed that

incremental theorists were likely to engage in learning goals (“It is important to me to feel that

my coursework offers me real challenges”). Entity theorists engaged more in performance goals

(“When I take a course in school, it is very important for me to validate that I am smarter than

other students”). Both groups valued achievement outcome goals (“It is very important for me to

do well in my courses”), but incremental theorists pursued these goals to a greater extent as

compared to entity theorists.

Types of Praise

Muller and Dweck (1998) revealed that praise for intelligence (praise for ability) could

affect negatively children’s motivation level and performance. They also discovered that children

who were praised more for their ability showed entity theorists’ characteristics. They researched

how children reacted after being praised for effort or for ability in different situations, after they

failed a task or succeeded in completing the task. The authors’ study had six research parts. In

the first part of the study, the authors hypothesized that children praised for either effort or

ability will react differently after being successful in completing a task than after they failed. The

authors asked the children to work on three sets of problems. Scores were based on the number

14

of problems being solved. They observed that children praised for effort put greater weight to

low effort when failing than did children who were praised for ability. Children praised for

ability blamed their failure on a lack of ability as compared to children praised for effort.

Furthermore, children praised for ability were less likely to want to persist on the problems than

children praised for their efforts.

The second part of Muller and Dweck’s (1998) study questioned whether praise for

ability in the absence of failure had also negative consequences for children’s motivation.

Children were randomly assigned to three different categories of praise:effort, ability, and

control. This questionnaire revealed that children praised for their intelligence (ability) did not

accept their poor performance more harshly than children praised for effort. Muller and Dweck’s

(1998) third part of the study was designed to replicate and extend the findings of the first one.

Children’s self-reports were also assessed in this part. It was discovered that praise for

intelligence (ability) even after children succeeded at completing a task made them highly entity-

oriented and they were willing to sacrifice learning opportunities.

The fourth part of the study (Muller & Dweck, 1998) revealed that children who were

praised for their ability were more likely than the children praised for their effort to have an

entity theory of intelligence. The fifth part of the study confirmed that praise for ability and

praise for effort influenced children. Children who were praised for their ability attributed their

failure to their poor abilities, while children who were praised for effort attributed their failure to

their poor efforts. The sixth part of the study confirmed all of the previous findings of the

authors. In addition, it pointed out that the different types of praise influenced children’s self-

theories of intelligence. The combined outcome of the different parts of the authors’ study

15

revealed that praise for ability consistently led to low motivation and entity self-theory of

intelligence among the children studied.

Kamins and Dweck (1999) discussed how children accepted person or ability (“You are

really good at this”) versus process or effort (“You must have tried really hard”) praise. The

authors looked at how these different types of praise influenced children. They asked the

participants to role-play four scenarios with dolls, in which they worked on a task and made an

error in the process. They had to choose dolls that represented them. Also, they were given

feedback. It was revealed that the different types of praise influenced children’s ratings of

themselves, their feelings and their responses after a setback. Children who received a person

(ability) type of praise believed that they were bad at doing things. Also, they were less likely

than children who received a process (effort) type of praise to persist on a task. This study also

showed that children who experienced praise for ability developed helpless responses and were

less motivated to continue working toward trying again and upgrading their skills.

Another study (Cimpian, Arce, Markman, & Dweck, 2007) also revealed that students

who were praised for their ability showed helpless behavior after failure and were less persistent

in working on tasks or were even willing to abandon these. The authors used a group of twenty

four children for their study. They gave them puppets and asked them to act a part of a scenario

and to draw pictures. The examiners used puppets that represented the teachers and their

responses. Half of the students were provided with the generic type of praise (praise for ability)

and the other half with the nongeneric type of praise (praise for effort). After this students were

asked self-evaluation questions. Students who received the generic praise showed helpless

responses. They felt sad, did not come up with strategies to improve their work and started to

16

avoid drawing in general. These results showed once again how the different types of praise

influenced students’ motivation.

Dweck (1999) talked about the different types of praise, ability and effort, and how they

influenced students’ motivation level and self-theories of intelligence. She explained that

students who were praised for their ability attributed their poor performance to poor ability. They

were less likely to continue upgrading their skills. They showed less persistence on tasks. Also,

they showed more entity characteristics and they were found to be in the less achieving group of

students. These students who were praised for their efforts attributed their failure to lack of

enough effort. They saw failure as a challenge. It made them work harder toward achieving their

learning goals. They showed more persistence toward resolving problems and they were usually

found to be in the high-achieving group of students.

Dweck (2007) talked again about the fact that there exist students who view their

intelligence as fixed (entity) and some who view it as malleable (incremental). She added that

entity theorists had a fixed mindset, while incremental theorists had a growth mindset. She

mentioned that students who had the fixed mindset were worried how they would be viewed by

others (smart or not smart). She stated that these students rejected opportunities to learn. They

were also afraid of effort because they believed that if they had the ability to do things they did

not need the effort. Dweck’s study pointed out that this was not the case for students who had

incremental self-theories of intelligence. The author used 7th

grade students from a New York

high school. The students were divided on two groups. All groups were told about study skills

and time management, but one of the groups was educated about the growth mindset. Students

from this group were told that they could upgrade their intelligence through hard work. These

17

students showed big changes in their motivation and performance. They wanted to learn more

and work more toward improving their skills.

The author (Dweck, 2007) also discussed her study with Mueller (Mueller & Dweck,

1998) in which some students were praised for effort and some for ability. She added that after

these types of praise the students were asked to agree or disagree with some comments (entity

and incremental based comments). It was discovered that students who were praised for their

ability agreed with the entity comments. The students who were provided with the praise for

effort agreed with the incremental comments. All these studies confirmed the idea that praise for

ability motivates students to upgrade their skills and increases their interest in learning.

Finally, Dweck (2008) states that people communicate mindsets (self-theories of

intelligence) through praise. She explains that intelligence (ability) praise encourages the

existence of a fixed mindset (entity self-theory of intelligence) in students, while effort praise

encourages the existence of a growth mindset (incremental self-theory of intelligence). She

mentions that both teachers and parents can help students develop a growth mindset by educating

students about the growth mindset and by using praise for effort as opposed to praise for ability.

She adds that this will motivate students to learn more and persist on tasks after facing some

challenges or setbacks. She concludes that helping students develop an incremental self-theory of

intelligence will encourage students to work on improving their skills and help them be

successful in their future careers.

Teaching Techniques and Supervision

Chenail (2009) discussed the importance of MFT teachers falling passionately in love

with student learning and focusing on the MFT competencies in order to help students achieve

their learning outcomes. The author talked about changing the teacher-student relationship and

18

developing a “faculty-student-learning-outcomes triad”. This researcher observed the changes

that took place in MFT students during their first year in the MFT program. He proposed that a

faculty team work together to encourage students’ learning progress and mastering of skills so

that the students could upgrade their skills and show competency. The author noticed that by

including this idea in the course objectives a shift took place in the work of the teachers and they

started working collaboratively in the name of helping students upgrade their competencies and

skills. The main goal of these faculty members became to involve students in the process of

acquiring more knowledge and skills. As a result, students reported, “I am learning so much”,

“My fear… is almost gone (smile). I know I still have a long way to go…” (p. 83). This idea of

upgrading one’s skills and knowledge is what Dweck (1999) called an incremental self-theory of

intelligence. Hence, this study underlined the important role that MFT professionals’ teaching

method can play in helping students have an incremental self-theory of intelligence and upgrade

their skills and competencies.

The researcher (Duffy-Roberts, 1999) looked at the “lived experience” of MFT

supervisors in the process of their work with supervisees. Duffy-Roberts had two focus groups.

She used eight American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy (AAMFT) approved

supervisors from San Antonio for her first focus group and nine AAMFT approved supervisors

from Houston for her second focus group. A qualitative focus group design and

phenomenological analysis were used to describe the essence of supervision. It was discovered

that the main structure of supervision included the supervisory relationship (supervisor’s role and

functions of the supervisor) and the purpose of supervision (building a vision and professional

development). Supervision was designed to be a place where supervisees developed a theory of

“good therapeutic practice”. This process was called building a vision. It was also revealed that a

19

big part of the supervision process was devoted to supervisors helping their supervisees

understand and better their work and grow professionally. This article pointed out that

supervision’s main purpose is to help supervisees establish a professional level of work and

continue upgrading their skills.

One type of MFT supervision stands out in relation to self-theories of intelligence and

praise, it is called solution-focused (Marek, Sandifer, Beach, Coward, & Protinsky, 1994). It

presents a model of supervision that focuses on therapist’s resources, strengths, social-

construction of meaning, and small changes. The authors discussed in detail how solution

focused supervision is organized and what techniques solution-focused supervisors should use.

They stated that solution-focused supervisors have to use techniques such as compliments, goal

setting, looking for exceptions to problems/failures, and asking scaling questions. They

mentioned that this supervision style could lead supervisees to look for solutions, based on their

past experience. They added that this type of supervision could motivate the supervisee to strive

for upgrading their skills. This article illustrated how solution-focused compliments encourage

students to work on improving their competency. This article was included in the body of this

work, because solution-focused compliments are considered a form of praise, which the author

believes could encourage incremental self-theories of intelligence in students.

Another supervision type that encourages students to upgrade their skills and nurtures

their incremental self-theories of intelligence is called the multi-positioned live supervision. This

type of supervision combines treatment and observation teams with first- and second-order,

modern and postmodern, or family systems and social constructionist perspectives (all of which

are main components of MFT training) (Lowe, Hunt, & Simmons, 2008). This method

encourages supervisees to use multiple positions in their work and explore ways of comparing

20

and integrating them. The supervisors are expected to ask supervisees questions like, “What

models or orientations do you feel most and least comfortable with? What are your main

learning goals, and how you will know if these are achieved?” (p. 11). The emphasis of

supervision is directed toward addressing professional training competencies. Supervisees are

provided with an opportunity to work with contrasting positions in order to learn how to

appreciate differences and explore options for integration. This allows them to upgrade their

skills by experimenting with combining different perspectives. This type of MFT supervision

was said to provoke supervisees to upgrade their professional skills. The multi-positioned live

supervision was included in the body of this paper because it clearly nourishes students’

incremental self-theories of intelligence by motivating them to continue to develop their

professional skills.

Glenn and Serovich (1994) talked about the need of documentation for MFT supervision.

They explained that the main responsibilities of supervisors are handling of cases under their

supervision, evaluating and encouraging supervisees’ work and progress, and making sure that

clients are provided with quality therapy. The authors pointed out that due to the large number of

cases, sometimes supervisees and their work could blend together over time and supervisors

could not provide their supervisees with precise feedback if they did not document their

individual progress over time. Glenn and Serovich added that positive reinforcement or praise is

very important for supervisees (Aponte, 1992; Frankel and Piercy, 1990; Mead, 1990; Zarski,

Sand-Pringle, Greenbank, & Cibik, 1991). The authors revealed that when therapists were

provided with a written report and praise for their positive therapist behaviors across cases they

responded with, “Gee, I did not know I was really getting good at this [therapy] until I looked at

my files and saw my different supervisors’ notes telling me over and over about the progress I

21

was making” (p. 348). In addition, it was discovered that positive reinforcement of supervisees

led to their good performance and professional growth. As a matter of fact, the authors called this

process “the heart and the soul of supervision”. Hence, this study pointed out that MFT

supervisors’ praise was a powerful tool, which encouraged supervisees to continue upgrading

their professional skills.

Another study (Anderson, Schlossberg, & Rigazio-DiGilio, 2000) revealed the

supervisees’ best and worst supervision experiences. The authors looked at components such as

open supervisory environment, communication, supervisory encouragement, attending to

personal growth, and providing conceptual and technical guidance and direction. The researchers

randomly selected participants from 52 Master’s and Doctoral programs in the United States and

Canada which were accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Marriage and Family

Therapy Education (COAMFTE). The participants were given a survey asking them about their

best and worst supervision experiences. It was discovered that supervision in the best

experiences balanced supervisees’ personal and professional growth. Supervisees in these cases

were provided with “praise and encouragement”, “useful conceptual frameworks” and

opportunities to develop their technical skills. Supervisors in the best experiences sample were

said to help their supervisees see their mistakes as “learning experiences”. These supervisors also

encouraged their students to explore different ideas and techniques. This environment was found

to encourage supervisees’ learning and their personal and professional growth. The worst

experiences were related to supervisors coming from a power position, discouraging different

viewpoints and focusing only on supervisees’ technical skills, mistakes, and other weaknesses

instead of looking at both personal and professional development of skills. Such environment

was found to be demotivating for students. This study showed that the supervisors who were in

22

the supervisees’ best experiences group, supported learning, and helped students grow personally

and professionally used such techniques as openness, support, respect, encouragement, praise,

and appreciation of individual differences. Thus, all these techniques, including praise and

encouragement, were found to be very important in motivating students to upgrade their skills

and grow personally and professionally.

Therapists Development and Competency

Becvar and Becvar (2009) outlined some of the components related to MFT students’

professional development. They talked about students showing proficiency in areas such as

theoretical foundations of family therapy with a focus on systems perspective, human

development and family studies with emphasis on individual and family development, sexual

functioning and psychopathology, the many therapeutic models and approaches, MFT values and

ethics, supervised practicum experience, and practical work with clients utilizing a systems

perspective. The authors mentioned that many of the supervisees following their second year of

clinical experience continued to focus on upgrading their knowledge and skills in the MFT field.

This is what the authors called the evolutionary process of Marriage and Family Therapists. This

article pointed out that the majority of MFTs continued to work on upgrading their professional

skills.

A study by Cornille, McWey, Nelson, and West (2003) looked at some of the skills that

MFT students and practicing professionals valued as being important in the field. The

participants were 108 students from thirty accredited MFT programs, chosen via web search on

the AAMFT web site. The participants were asked to fill a questionnaire related to their MFT

skills. Students were asked about which types of therapies they used and what therapeutic skills

and techniques they found important. MFTs underlined the importance of using diversity of

23

therapeutic skills and taking on both a collaborative and expert position. Some of the additional

skills that the MFT students found important were intellectual curiosity, accepting feedback from

colleagues and supervisors, accepting other’s perspective, changing treatment plans with new

information, being flexible, etc. This study showed that an important part of MFT students’

development was to be able to accept their supervisor’s feedback, be flexible, and upgrade their

skills in combining an expert and collaborative position.

Another article (Coward, 1996) pointed out the significant events and themes in the

development of MFT students. The researcher used a qualitative approach characterized by one-

on-one in depth interviews. Eight MFT therapists from an accredited MFT program were

interviewed and videotaped. The main developmental themes that the author discovered were the

integration of personal and professional selves, increased motivation for learning, using

resiliency skills, balancing different strategies and awareness, and maintaining boundaries. The

author revealed that the interaction between events, awareness, developmental motivation, and

resiliency led MFTs to professional growth. In addition, the author mentioned that MFT

supervision served as a map for therapists during their journey of development. This study

pointed out that many components, some of which were awareness, motivation, and supervision,

played an important role in MFTs’ professional development process.

All the components described in this literature review play a large role in the

development of the MFT therapists’ professional skills. They are also likely to influence the

formulation of their self-theories of intelligence. For example, it is likely that supervisors who

work to encourage students’ learning progress and mastering of skills also help students grow

professionally and develop an incremental self-theory of intelligence. Supervision types such as

solution-focused and multi-positioned live supervision encouraged students to continue

24

upgrading their skills and nurture students’ incremental self-theories of intelligence. It was also

revealed that MFT students rated as their best supervisees’ experiences the moments when their

supervisors praised their effort and encouraged them to keep exploring different therapeutic

perspectives. In conclusion, it is possible that these components play a role in the MFT students’

process of development and formulation of self-theories of intelligence. Yet, this has not been

studied in the field of MFT. As such, this research project is designed to assess these

components and the relationship between them.

25

Chapter III: Methodology

Subject Selection and Description

Participants were identified using the UW-Stout MFT program email addresses for the

2010 and 2011 cohorts of MFT students who completed the clinical practicum portion of their

training. They were contacted via email asking them to participate in the investigator’s study.

Twenty four MFT students were contacted. From the pool of these contacted people thirteen

responded. One of these thirteen respondents was excluded due to not completing the whole

questionnaire. Four of the twelve participants were male (33%) and eight were female (67%).

Instrumentation

Those who choose to participate in the research completed Dweck’s “Self-theories of

Intelligence Scales,” “Questionnaire Goal Choice Items” and “Implicit Theory of the World”

(1999). Students also completed items which measured their perception of the degree to which

supervisors praised their ability and effort, and items assessing their reported effort to upgrade

their competency. This researcher created the praise for ability and effort questionnaire and the

upgrading competency questionnaire based on Dweck’s ideas and under the supervision of her

research advisor. The questionnaire consisted of a total of 25 items. Demographic data was also

collected regarding participant’s age and sex.

Data Collection Procedures

The e-mailing list of participants was acquired from the Program Director of the MFT

Master’s program at UW-Stout. Participants were contacted and asked to participate in the

investigator’s Plan B study. A link to an on-line questionnaire and Informed Consent was placed

at the beginning of the questionnaire. Only those participants who read the Informed Consent

26

form and agreed to participate in the study could proceed to the survey. The overall response rate

was (50%).

Data Analysis

Although it was the researcher’s original intend to conduct statistical t-test analysis, this

could not be performed due to poor variability among responses. For example, all but three of the

participants were incremental, which made it hard for the researcher to test her hypotheses. There

were no praise for ability responses, so the researcher could not test her hypotheses related to

differences in types of praise. There was only one entity respondent who showed equal scores on

continued development and reduced development, and no respondents reported a reduced

development response, thus comparisons could not be made in these areas.

Consequently, the researcher was left with the only option to use descriptive statistics.

Descriptive statistics provide a simple summary about the sample and the measures in a study

(http://www.socialresearchmethods .net/kb/statinf.php). By using descriptive statistics the author

basically reveals what the data shows in a sensible way. Researchers who use descriptive

statistics must be careful not to distort the data or lose important details. Although, descriptive

statistics have these limitations, they provide a powerful summary of the research information

which may help the researcher to do initial comparisons across people or other components of

the study.

Although this study does not allow the application of inferential statistics, if the data

contained enough variability to organize the data into groups the author could make conclusions

that go beyond the immediate data (http://www.socialresearchmethods .net/kb/statinf.php). Most

importantly, inferential statistics show if the difference between groups is a dependable one or if

it happened simply by chance. The simplest inferential test used to compare the average

27

performance between two groups is called t-test. The t-test shows if the means of two groups are

statistically different from each other. It is also proven to be especially useful when the

researcher is trying to conduct analysis for posttest-only two-group randomized experimental

design. Hence, by applying inferential statistics to a representative subject pool, the researcher

may make inferences from the data to more general conditions related to the population.

Data analysis consisted of examining subjects’ responses to items assessing incremental

and entity self-theories of intelligence, praise for ability and effort, continued development and

reduced development. These were rated on the basis of Dweck’s ideas for questions framed from

and entity perspective (e.g. “Our world has basic or ingrained dispositions, and you really can’t

do much to change them) and rated as follows: 1-3 (1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = mostly

agree) were considered entity view, and 4-6 (4 = mostly disagree, 5 = disagree, 6 = strongly

disagree) were considered incremental view. The same method was used for rating questions

framed from an incremental perspective. Praise for ability questions (e.g. “My supervisor’s

praise usually led me to think I had sufficiently mastered a specific competency) were rated as

follows: 1-3 (1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = mostly agree) were considered praise for ability

perspective, and 4-6 (4 = mostly disagree, 5 = disagree, 6 = strongly disagree) were considered

praise for effort perspective. The same method was followed for questions framed from praise

for effort perspective. The continued development questions (e.g. “After meeting with my

supervisor I was motivated to keep building my competency”) were also rated by using the same

system: 1-3 (1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = mostly agree) were said to have continued

development view, and 4-6 (4 = mostly disagree, 5 = disagree, 6 = strongly disagree) were said

to have reduced development view. This system was also followed for the reduced development

28

questions. This researcher also scored the participants’ results. Example for the scoring of the

entity and incremental responses is provided in Appendix E.

29

Chapter IV: Results

Item Analysis

Although using descriptive statistics limits the researcher to simply describe what is

happening in the data, the results are interesting. All participants were chosen from a Midwest

University in the United States. Surveys were sent to 24 subjects. Twelve responded. A

majority of the participants (99%) were Caucasian American students. Although there was a 50%

response rate, there was a predominance of female participants (67%) while only 33% of the

participants were male. However, this researcher could claim that this sample is actually

representative of the MFT field, because study done by Ambrose (1997) suggested that the MFT

profession is made up of more women (53%) than men (47%).

The items were rated based on Dweck’s system and scored as shown in Appendix E. It

was discovered that based on both their number of responses and their scores 75% of the

participants were incremental. Only 25% of the respondents were found to be entity theorists. In

the area of incremental intelligence 33% of the participants had extremely high incremental

responses. For example, with 15 being the highest score possible for the incremental intelligence

items three participants scored as high as 13. All the participants according to their ratings and

scores were found to be in the praise for effort group. Participants’ effort scores ranged from 12

to 20. All participants, but one, were found to be in the continued development group with

continued development scores from 6 to 11. This one participant had equal number of continued

development and reduced development responses. This participant was said to be continued

development/reduced development individual. This individual was found to have also an entity

self-theory of intelligence. For more information on results see Table 1. All respondents reported

receiving praise for effort, and all but one reported to be in the continued development group.

30

Only, three fell into the entity group. Thus, these results did not lend themselves to inferential

analysis.

Table 1 Findings

Intelligence Praise Development

Category: Entity Incremental Ability Effort Reduced Continued

Respondents: 3 9 0 12 0 11

The following speculations about the hypotheses are based on the data available, but no

probability conclusions can be drawn. Hypothesis 1, 2 and 4 were not supported by the findings

of this research. All participants even if they had high or low entity intelligence and high or low

incremental intelligence were found to be in the praise for effort group. Hypothesis 3 was

strongly supported. The participants who had high incremental intelligence were also found to

have high praise for effort (e.g. participant number 9 had an incremental score of 13 and a praise

for effort score of 14). Hypothesis 5 was also strongly supported. Participants that indicated high

praise for effort showed high scores of continued development in their competency (e.g.

participant number 9 had a praise for effort score of 14 and a continued development score of

10). Hypothesis 6 was partially supported. The one participant who was classified as both

continued development/ reduced development had a low praise for effort score of 4. Hypothesis

7 and 8 could not be tested because no one of the participants was found to experience praise for

ability.

Hypothesis 9 was not supported. Even participants with high entity intelligence according

to their responses and scores were found to be in the continued development group (e.g.

participant 5 had an entity score of 6 and a continued development score of 11). Hypothesis 10

was supported. The participants who were low on their entity intelligence were found to have

31

high continued effort in upgrading their therapeutic skills (e.g. participant 12 had an entity score

4 and a continued development score of 10). Hypothesis 11 was supported. Participants who had

high incremental intelligence score had also high continued development score (e.g. participant 9

had an incremental score of 13 and a continued development score of 10). Hypothesis 12 was not

supported, because even the participants with a low incremental score showed continued effort to

develop their therapeutic skills (e.g. participant 12 had an incremental score of 5 and a continued

development score of 6).

32

Chapter V: Discussion

The work of Dweck (1999, 2006) was used to show the importance of students’

developing an incremental self-theory of intelligence, which motivated students to upgrade their

skills and competency as opposed to an entity self-theory of intelligence, which made students

believe that they had a specific set of skills and they could not upgrade these. Dweck’s (2007,

2008) further research on the different types of praise, praise for ability and effort, and their

influence on students’ self-theories of intelligence showed that students who were praised for

their ability were not motivated in upgrading their skills and acquired more entity theorist ways

of thinking. Students who were praised for their efforts continued developing their skills and

were described as acquiring incremental theorist thinking.

This pilot study is the first conducted in the field of Marriage and Family Therapy to

examine how MFT supervisees’ perceptions of the type of praise (praise for ability or effort)

they received from their MFT supervisors influenced them. It was expected that the different

types of praise would influence supervisees’ self-theories of intelligence (entity or incremental)

and their efforts for upgrading their competency. A number of different hypotheses were tested,

including the hypothesis that students who score high on incremental types of intelligence would

score high on praise for effort. It was also hypothesized that students who score high on

incremental intelligence would score high on their continued effort to improve their skills as

therapists. It was hypothesized that students who scored high on entity self-theory of

intelligence would score high on praise for ability. In addition, praise for ability would have

negative consequences for both incremental and entity theorists and would be related to less

persistence in improving students’ skills.

33

Because of the one-side nature of the responses, the data collected for this study was not

enough to allow for the use of statistics that compare differences between groups. Yet, at the

same time it is the extreme one-sidedness of the responses that provide support for some of the

researcher’s hypotheses. It was revealed that all but three of twelve participants in the study were

incremental theorists. Furthermore, all participants, the entity and the incremental theorists,

stated that they were praised for effort.

All participants, but one, were found to have continued development responses and were

motivated to continue upgrading their skills in the field. The one respondent was an entity

theorist, but this person’s score was split between continued development/ reduced development.

With minor exception these findings show that the MFT supervisors in this program (UW-Stout)

provide their supervisees with an environment that provokes them to continue upgrading their

skills. In short, supervisees’ perceptions were that their supervisors praised them for their effort,

which resulted in supervisees’ incremental self-theory of intelligence. This makes sense when

viewed with the current literature on MFT supervision.

Supervision articles were included in this study to show how different types of

supervision encouraged MFT supervisees to upgrade their skills. More specifically, articles

related to solution-focused and multi-positioned supervision were used (Marek et al., 1994;

Lowe et al., 2008). It was found that supervisors who used these types of supervision nurtured

supervisees’ incremental self-theory of intelligence and encouraged them to upgrade their skills.

Another study (Glenn, & Serovich, 1994) talked about the importance of documenting

supervisees’ progress. According to this study, the fact that supervisees were provided with

documentation on their progress and praised for their work in this way motivated them to

continue upgrading their professional skills. Other researchers (Aponte, 1992; Frankel & Piercy,

34

1990; Mead, 1990; Zarski et al., 1991) also pointed out the positive effect that reinforcement and

praise had on supervisees. Another article revealed that supervisees’ best experiences were

related to having supervisors who praised them for their efforts and encouraging them to keep

developing their skills (Anderson et al., 2000).

Research related to MFT students’ professional development (Becvar, & Becvar, 2009;

Cornille et al., 2003) was also discussed in the body of this paper. The literature showed that the

majority of MFT supervisees continued to upgrade their skills. In addition, it was revealed that

MFT students saw as an important part of their development the ability to accept their

supervisor’s feedback, be flexible, and upgrade their skills by combining different positions.

Another study (Coward, 1996) showed that there were different themes in MFT supervisees’

development, but the ones that played the most important role were said to be awareness,

motivation and supervision. The results of this study combined with the MFT literature suggests

that MFT supervisors strongly value and encourage developing incremental intelligence in their

students leading to continued professional development. It appears that MFT supervisors use

praise consistent with Dweck’s “praise for effort” to help accomplish this.

Limitations

As stated, statistical t-test analysis could not be made due to the one-sided nature of the

responses. While small size could be blamed, the extreme one-sidedness suggests that these

results would not change dramatically even if the sample was larger. Still, this made it hard for

the researcher to test her hypotheses. There were no praise for ability responses, so the researcher

could not test her hypotheses related to praise for ability. There was only one entity respondent

who showed equal scores on continued development and reduced development, and there was

not even one respondent who had a reduced development response. This researcher could

35

speculate that the majority of students who enter the MFT program are incremental theorists who

are motivated to upgrade their skills and believe that their supervisors always praise them for

their effort. Further research is needed to support this idea. Finally, another limitation of this

research project was that the participants were contacted initially over the 4th

of July weekend

and a big family tradition for most American families is to go camping during this Holiday

weekend. Thus, there is a strong possibility that most of the participants did not get the survey

until they came back from their vacation and by then they had many other e-mails to take care of

which were a priority. Participants were sent two reminders after the initial survey was sent out.

Couple of people replied after the first reminder and couple after the second. This researcher also

questioned how often the MFT students who graduated two years ago were checking their UW-

Stout e-mails. This was the only way of contact with these graduates. The researcher thinks that

if these students were contacted in another way there might have been a bigger response rate.

Recommendations

This author suggests that further research is done related to the different types of MFT

supervisors’ praise and their effect on MFT student’s motivation and continued development. In

addition, another one of Dweck’s (2007) ideas could be tested with MFT students. They could be

divided on two groups and each group could be provided with a different type of praise. This

research may lead to different results. Further research is also needed related to MFT student’s

self-theories of intelligence and how these are influenced by MFT supervisors’ types of praise.

Such research could be conducted pretest, pre entering the MFT program, and posttest, after

completing the program, in order for researchers to observe what changes take place in students’

self-theories of intelligence and motivation. There is not enough research information in the

MFT research literature for any of these topics. Moreover, research could be extended to include

36

how the different types of MFT supervisor’s praise help or hinder supervisees’ confidence and

self-efficacy. To advance this research it will be important to incorporate a more diverse MFT

sample, consisting of more males and more participants from different cultural backgrounds,

more participants from different U.S. training programs, and perhaps an international sample.

In addition, Dweck’s ideas (1999, 2006) were never before tested with a Master’s

students sample. This researcher could assume that the majority of students who enter Master’s

level programs are incremental theorists interested in upgrading their knowledge and skills. More

research is needed to prove this idea. Pretest (preprogram) and posttest (after program) of all

these ideas could be done. This would be helpful to clarify if Master’s level students enter the

program as incremental theorists or if they develop this theory while being a part of the MFT

Master’s program. This researcher did not contact other U.S. institutions. This option could

provide a more diverse research sample and a bigger pool of participants.

Conclusions

This pilot study investigated how different types of MFT supervisors’ praise motivated or

demotivated students in upgrading their professional skills. This research also considered the

connection between students’ self-theory of intelligence, supervisors’ type of praise, and

students’ continued development. The study had for a goal to start the process of looking at the

power of praise as one of the many different aspects of supervision that is so important for

students’ motivation and development. The results of this study could help supervisors decide

what type of praise benefits student skill development. Furthermore, this research pointed out

other areas that need to be further researched and could lead to the discovery of new areas for

growth in supervision practices.

37

References

Ambrose, J. (1997). How MFTs compare to other disciplines. Family Therapy News, 28,

16-26.

Anderson, S., Schlossberg, M., & Rigazio-DiGilio, S. (2000). Family therapy trainees’

evaluations of their best and worst supervision experiences. Journal of Marital and

Family Therapy, 26, 79-91.

Aponte, H. (1992). Training the person of the therapist in structural family therapy. Journal of

Marital and Family Therapy, 18, 269-281.

Beckvar, D. S., & Becvar, R. J. (2009). Family Therapy: A systemic integration (7th

ed.). Boston:

Allyn and Bacon.

Bliss, V., & Bray, D. (2009). The smallest solution focused particles: Towards a minimalist

definition of when therapy is solution focused. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 28,

62-74.

Brophy, J. (1981). Teacher praise: A functional analysis. Review of Educational Research, 51,

5-32.

Butler, R. (2000). Making judgements about ability: The role of implicit theories of ability in

moderating inferences from temporal and social comparison information. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 965-978.

Chenail, R. (2009). Learning marriage and family therapy in the time of competencies. Journal

of Systems Therapies, 28, 72-87.

Cimpian, A., Arce, H., Markman, E., & Dweck, C. (2007). Subtle linguistic cues affect

children’s motivation. Psychological Science, 18, 314-316.

Cornille, T., McWey, L., Nelson, T., & West, S. (2003). How do master’s level marriage and

38

family therapy students view their basic therapy skills? An examination of generic and

theory specific clinical approaches to family therapy. International Journal, 25, 41-61.

Coward, R. (1996). Significant events and themes in the development of marriage and family

therapists: A qualitative study. Dissertation Abstracts International, 57(4), 2903B.

Delin, C., & Baumeister, R. (1994). Praise: More than just social reinforcement. Journal for the

Theory of Social Behaviour, 24, 219-241.

Duffy-Roberts, B, (1999). The supervisor’s understanding of supervision: A phenomenological

analysis of focus group discussions. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(6), 2938B.

Dweck, C. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development.

Philadelphie: Tylor and Francis / Psychology Press.

Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.

Dweck, C. (2007). The perils and promises of praise. The wrong kind of praise creates self-

defeating behavior. The right kind motivates students to learn. Educational Leadership,

65, 34-39.

Dweck, C. (2008). The secret of raising smart kids. Scientific American Mind, 18, 36-43.

Dweck, C., Chiu, C., & Hong, Y. (1995). Implicit theories and their role in judgments and

reactions: A world from two perspectives. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 267-285.

Dweck, C., & Leggett, E. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality.

Psychological Review, 95, 256-272.

Fiske, H., & Zalter, B. (2005). A solution-focused group message. Journal of Family

Psychotherapy, 16, 123-125.

Frankel, B., & Piercy, F. (1990). The relationship among selected supervisor, therapist, and

client behaviors. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 16, 407-421.

39

Funderburk, B., & Eyberg, S. (2011). Parent-child interaction therapy. In J. Norcross,

G. VandenBos, & D. Freedheim (Eds.), History of psychotherapy: Continuity and

change (p. 415-420). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Glenn, E., & Serovich, J. (1994). Documentation of family therapy supervision: A rationale and

method. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 22, 345-355.

Grant, H., & Dweck, C. (2003). Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 541-553.

Henderson, V., & Dweck, C. (1990). Motivation and achievement. In S. Feldman &

G. Elliott (Eds.), At the threshold: The developing adolescent (p. 308-329). Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press.

Hong, Y., Dweck, C., Chiu, C., Derrick, M., & Wan, W. (1999). Implicit theories, attributions,

and coping: A meaning system approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

77, 588-599.

Kamins, M., & Dweck, C. (1999). Person versus process praise and criticism: Implications for

contingent self-worth and coping. Developmental Psychology, 35, 835-847.

Kanouse, D., Gumpert, P., & Canavan-Gumpert, D. (1981). The semantics of praise. In J.

Harvey, W. Ickes, & R. Kidd (Eds.), New directions in attribution research (p. 97-115).

Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Koestner, R., Zuckerman, M., & Koestner, J. (1987). Praise, involvement, and intrinsic

motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 383-390.

Leitenberg, H., Agras, W., Allen, R., Butz, R., & Edwards, J. (1975). Feedback and therapist

praise during treatment of phobia. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43,

396-404.

40

Leonard, K. (1997). In search of praise. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 66, 15-19.

Lowe, R., Hunt, C., & Simmons, P. (2008). Towards multi-positioned live supervision in family

therapy: Combining treatment and observation teams with first- and second-order

perspectives. Contemporary Family Therapy, 30, 3-14.

Mangels, J., Butterfield, B., Lamb, J., Good, C., & Dweck, C. (2006). Why do beliefs about

intelligence influence learning success? A social cognitive neuroscience model. SCAN, 1,

75-86.

Marek, L., Sandifer, D., Beach, A., Coward, R, & Protinsky, H. (1994). Supervision without the

problem: A model of solution-focused supervision. Journal of Family Psychotherapy,

5, 57-64.

Mead, D. (1990). Effective supervision: A task-oriented model for the mental health professions.

New York: Brunner / Mazel.

Metcalf, L. (1995). Great expectations. Learning, 23, 93-96.

Mueller, C., & Dweck, C. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children’s motivation

and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 33-52.

Schunk, D. (1983). Ability versus effort attributional feedback: Differential effects on self-

efficacy and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 848-856.

Statistics. Retrieved August 1, 2011 from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/sampstat.php

Yu, J., Roberts, M., Wong, M., Shen, Y. (2011). Acceptability of behavioral family therapy

among caregivers in China. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 20, 272-278.

Zarski, J., Sand-Pringle, C., Greenbank, M., & Cibik, P. (1991). The invisible mirror: In-home

family therapy and supervision. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 16, 127-132.

41

Appendix A: Implicit Theory of the World

This questionnaire has been designed to investigate ideas about how people see the world they

live in as fixed or malleable. There is no right or wrong answers. We are interested in your ideas.

Using the scale below, please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the

following statements by writing the number that corresponds to your opinion in the space next to

each statement.

1. Though we can change some phenomena, it is unlikely that we can alter the core dispositions

of our world.

1 2 3 4 5 6

Strongly Agree Mostly Mostly Disagree Strongly

Agree Agree Disagree Disagree

2. Our world has basic or ingrained dispositions, and you really can’t do much to change them.

1 2 3 4 5 6



3. Some societal trends may dominate for a while, but the fundamental nature of our world is

something that cannot be changed much.

1 2 3 4 5 6



42

Appendix B: Questionnaire Goal Choice Items

1. If I knew I wasn’t going to do well at a task, I probably wouldn’t do it even if I might learn a

lot from it.

1 2 3 4 5 6



2. Although I hate to admit it, I sometimes would rather do well in a class than learn a lot.

1 2 3 4 5 6



3. It is much more important for me to learn things in my classes than it is to get the best grades.

1 2 3 4 5 6



4. If I had to choose between getting a good grade and being challenged in class, I would

choose… (Circle one)

“good grade” “being challenges”

___________________________________________________________________________

1 Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development.

Philadelphia: Psychology Press.

43

Appendix C: Praise for Ability and Praise for Effort Questionnaire

1. When I met with my on-campus supervisor I was praised mostly for my ability to do therapy.

Example: “You are a good therapist!”

1 2 3 4 5 6



2. My supervisor’s praise usually led me to think I had sufficiently mastered a specific

competency.

1 2 3 4 5 6



3. Once my supervisor was satisfied with my mastery of a certain skill we would seldom focus

on it again during the semester.

1 2 3 4 5 6



4. I looked forward to the supervisor suggesting that I do a skill well.

1 2 3 4 5 6



5. I left supervision feeling I had achieved sufficient skill development.

1 2 3 4 5 6



6. Supervision helped me believe that I will someday be accomplished as a therapist.

1 2 3 4 5 6



44

7. When I met with my on-campus supervisor I was praised mostly for my effort to bec

6poji - uw-stout · 2011. 9. 7. · helpful solution-focused compliments can be for clients...

Documents